I'm looking to try a macro version of a 50m lens, but preferably no slower than 2.8. Any suggestions ?
Mount doesn't really matter, I have adapters for a lot of them, and can purchase more if needed...

There isn't much choice there if you want something at f/2.8 or faster. Panagor and Vivitar have released a 55/2.8 that goes all the way to 1:1 and seems to be decent at least. There is the Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8 which is excellent at longer range, but not as good up close as the Micro-Nikkor 55/3.5; besides that the 55/2.8 is notorious for having or getting oil on the aperture blades. I had them both and kept the 55/3.5. And the non-plus-ultra here is the Olympus OM 50/2 macro, which is not cheap (and that's an understatement; think somewhere between € 500 and € 1000). There's also a Leica R 60/2.8, don't know about Contax. You'll probably be aware that there is a wealth of choices from all major brands if you can get by with a speed of f/3.5.

Tons of them. Canon, Konica, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus etc. all made a 50/3.5 or 55/3.5 macro in some form. And all of them have a solid reputation. Pentax made a Macro Takumar/Pentax 50/4 which seems to be excellent as well. Just search eBay on 50mm macro and you'll get more hits than I'd care to browse through . I'm strongly biased to Minolta and I have a soft spot for my Minolta Macro Celtic 50/3.5 sample, a budget version of the Rokkor 50/3.5 (not to mention the superb/excellent/fantastic/... MD Macro 100/4). But as they say, there aren't any bad macro lenses, so it's hard to go wrong here.

I'm looking to try a macro version of a 50m lens, but preferably no slower than 2.8. Any suggestions ?
Mount doesn't really matter, I have adapters for a lot of them, and can purchase more if needed...

Click to expand...

For macro work with Nex you don't need 2.8 and slower lens will be much cheaper and there will be much more choice. I think that I will be looking for 50mm macro too (but not now, next summer with takumar 100mm).

In fact I'm not intending to do any macro per se. I just want it as a very close focus portrait lens, hence the wish for the fastest possible lens. But 3.5 might be usable. I'll check them out. Thanks a lot !

Don't forget the Sony SAL50M28 I have this lens for my a77 its an f2.8 50mm macro just like you wanted there is also the Minolta version same lens different name really. Plenty of them on eBay the Minolta version is around half the price.

If you don't care about the price then i'd say the Olympus OM 50/2 macro. It's a great lens.

For slower options i'd suggest the MC Rokkor 50/3.5 and Super Takumar 50/4. The Konica 50/3.5 is also pretty nice. Both the Minolta and Konica come with a 1:1 adapter as part of the kit. Optically I think the super Takumar is a tiny bit better but prefer the color on the Minolta.

If you don't care about the price then i'd say the Olympus OM 50/2 macro. It's a great lens.

For slower options i'd suggest the MC Rokkor 50/3.5 and Super Takumar 50/4. The Konica 50/3.5 is also pretty nice. Both the Minolta and Konica come with a 1:1 adapter as part of the kit. Optically I think the super Takumar is a tiny bit better but prefer the color on the Minolta.

Click to expand...

Thanks Kevin ! And, right now, still not knowing what to do with the whole X-E thing, money IS an object, lol. I'm sure, given time, the Fuji can deliver "better" IQ, or more lovable, than the 7. However, I'm having quite a bit of NEX experience under my belt by now, and I'm queezing results out of the NEX with ease, while still trying to bend that leaning curve on the X-E.
It's also great two compare the 7 with another great, equally capable camera, because it makes little things that I like stand out, like the great flip screen that I use an often lot, and the TriNavi controls that just seems more useful and smarter by the hour. I can really see what Sony had in mind here when they designed that groundbreaking UI for the NEX, and boy, it took guts to do so. Too bad they half baked it and only allowed it to work flawlessly on their flagship model. Because if you REALLY wanna take advantage of the no-marked-button-everything-user-configurable concept, you need at least a certain number of external controls to do so, which non 7 models have been robbed of. Also at the entry level, the concept is counter intuitive, since you ask P&S upgraders with no photographic culture or knowledge (for 99% of them) to assign their own functions to buttons while thy don't have a clue what sort of control would be useful to them to start with ! It seems a all or nothing approach. Either you're a well rounded enthusiast and you'll make your own bed to sleep in, or you're a rank beginner and you'll stick to iAuto and shut up...

Thanks Kevin ! And, right now, still not knowing what to do with the whole X-E thing, money IS an object, lol. I'm sure, given time, the Fuji can deliver "better" IQ, or more lovable, than the 7. However, I'm having quite a bit of NEX experience under my belt by now, and I'm queezing results out of the NEX with ease, while still trying to bend that leaning curve on the X-E.
It's also great two compare the 7 with another great, equally capable camera, because it makes little things that I like stand out, like the great flip screen that I use an often lot, and the TriNavi controls that just seems more useful and smarter by the hour. I can really see what Sony had in mind here when they designed that groundbreaking UI for the NEX, and boy, it took guts to do so. Too bad they half baked it and only allowed it to work flawlessly on their flagship model. Because if you REALLY wanna take advantage of the no-marked-button-everything-user-configurable concept, you need at least a certain number of external controls to do so, which non 7 models have been robbed of. Also at the entry level, the concept is counter intuitive, since you ask P&S upgraders with no photographic culture or knowledge (for 99% of them) to assign their own functions to buttons while thy don't have a clue what sort of control would be useful to them to start with ! It seems a all or nothing approach. Either you're a well rounded enthusiast and you'll make your own bed to sleep in, or you're a rank beginner and you'll stick to iAuto and shut up...

Click to expand...

I think the NEX 7 is what it is as a result of what Sony learned with the models that came before it. They took the things that worked and those that didn't and applied that to the development of the 7. The Tri-Nav is a brilliant design but I think the different models appeal to different types of users. As a minimalist the controls on the non Tri-Nav equipped models are perfectly useable because I only need to adjust a few things I don't find the paucity of controls an impediment to what I do. That said, I could see upgrading to the successor to the 7 at some point.

As for the Fuji...it's a lovely system to be sure. Like you I have a level of comfort with the NEX so I would need a big improvement in order got me to undergone the hassle and expense of a switch. Right now I see the Fuji and NEX as being comparable in IQ (maybe as light edge to the Fuji) but the NEX has some advantages I'd be reluctant to give up like focus peaking and the flip-up screen. When my NEX finally gives up the ghost I'll definitely see what Fuji has to offer but right now I don't see much that will help me make significantly better images.

They're both very, very nice. I do think the X-E might have an IQ edge, all things being equal, but I'm not there yet that I can squeeze its best at each shot, and not sure I want to work to get there.
I'm asking myself : if I owned none, and was offered to keep either, which one would it be ? Even like that it's a tough question.
Now it's rethorical only, because I do own the 7, and know it like the back of my hand by now, so there's little sense wanting to change, and the delta in IQ is marginal at best, absolutely not relevant enough that I'd want to ditch one for the other. I think at this point it's more of an ego/status kind of thing, what kind image does one want to project . Modern, groundbreaking with the 7, or retro cool and in-the-know with Fuji ? Sheesh, too hard to decide anything, I should get myself a small SLT to change the subject

I think a good legacy 50mm macro might just be the easiest thing to get a good deal on.

My old Micro-Nikkor 55/3.5 has been a super workhorse. Literally a legacy lens - my dad used it since the early '70s. In most tests, I absolutely can not discern any difference in sharpness from a Leica Macro 60mm. The old Micro-Nikkors are super rugged and you can find them for well under $100 all over the place. The '80s AI version gets bumped up to f/2.8.

I would also love to get my hands on the Zeiss 50/2 macro. When I finally go full-frame, that could be the one true do-it-all lens. Alas, those are not to be found under $100. More like $1000... if you're lucky.

I have both the minolta 50 3.5 macro and the cannon 3.5 macro. I think they are both pretty awesome. Kinda bonded with the can a little more as the focus is a bit stiffer on my copy. Color and contrast is almost equal in my copies.

I'm looking to try a macro version of a 50m lens, but preferably no slower than 2.8. Any suggestions ?
Mount doesn't really matter, I have adapters for a lot of them, and can purchase more if needed...

Click to expand...

I have the Minolta 50mm f:2.8 in A mount.

I make no claim to being a serious macro shooter, so I do not qualify as an expert on the subject, but the lens is very nice - IMO.

Links in this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.